Donald Trump

[pipbarber]

The craziness of the politics is all predicated against the end times of climate change. It's all so fucking stooopid. That meteor from 'dont look up' is basically visible right now and 'merica, and probably 'stralia are about to elect climate change denying governments that will drastically enrich the wealthiest people on the planet who presumably know their time is numbered and are busily building bunkers or trying to escape to Mars but honestly they're just as fucked as everyone else. It's a weird kind of digital pantomime that seems to be playing out in slow motion.

This is the way the world ends, not with a bang but a...meme.

It's all so...undignified, or something.

[pipbarber]

Trump is miles ahead in the betting markets. He's as firm as $1.30 on some platforms but the strong favorite on all of them. Harris seems to be very slightly ahead in the polls. What to make of that? Are right wingers more likely to bet on elections (or more likely to gamble generally)? Are the markets being manipulated for a massive late plunge on Harris? (That seems unlikely). How to explain this?

If Trump actually wins relatively easily, thus reflecting gambling markets, where does that leave polling companies and the act of polling itself? May as well just shut up shop and watch the gambling.

Beside everything else at stake, this is a mini plebiscite between predictive electoral methods.

[stylofone]

Trump is miles ahead in the betting markets. He's as firm as $1.30 on some platforms but the strong favorite on all of them. Harris seems to be very slightly ahead in the polls. What to make of that? Are right wingers more likely to bet on elections (or more likely to gamble generally)? Are the markets being manipulated for a massive late plunge on Harris? (That seems unlikely). How to explain this?

If Trump actually wins relatively easily, thus reflecting gambling markets, where does that leave polling companies and the act of polling itself? May as well just shut up shop and watch the gambling.

Beside everything else at stake, this is a mini plebiscite between predictive electoral methods.

Remember how 2020 was this terrible year and everyone was glad it was over? Jon Oliver blew it up in his last show of the year. At the time I thought, I don't think we're at the end of a bad year. We're at the start of a bad decade. In 2020 Trump got more votes than any candidate in any US Presidential election ever... except Biden. It was terrifying. And now here we are again with an even scarier election than 2016 or 2020, because Trump is so much worse. Bezos and Zuckerberg have turned, Musk is no longer bothering to hide his true colours, we have Vance instead of Pence, there is a clear fascist blueprint with money and organisation behind it, they plan to give Ukraine (or at least the east) to their role model Putin. Then there's the misogyny, it's the manocalypse. Even if sanity prevails and Harris wins, we're still in a terrible position, worse than we were after Biden won... unless there's a surprise landslide and she wins by a lot,

[stevebrooks]

Trump is miles ahead in the betting markets. He's as firm as $1.30 on some platforms but the strong favorite on all of them.

We all know what to make of that, it's been researched and tracked down to four huge cryptocurrency bets from France that dropped 30 million on Trump to win, betting markets are notorious for being skewed by a small number of very rich people and discrepancies int he amount traded and amount reported;

Chaos Labs attributed this to Polymarket conflating traded shares with U.S. dollars. To put it more clearly, users can buy shares of candidates at different odds. A “yes” share of Hillary Clinton for president costs just $0.01, given the vast unlikelihood that she will be elected, but Chaos Labs found that Polymarket is reporting that share as $1 of volume.

And wash trading of course;

It then separated users who exhibited signs of wash trading, examining their ratio of buy and sell orders and taking account of their share holdings compared with their trading volume. Chaos Labs concluded that around one-third of trading volume—and overall users—on the presidential market alone was likely wash trading, along with across all markets.

So it's a market that's open to huge manipulation and is no reflection of actual voter preference, it's actually a reflection of political parties willingness to falsely skew numbers to create a misleading narrative, and we all know who does that!

In predicting the winners of elections betting markets are exactly garbage, so don't let them get you down!

https://fortune.com/crypto/2024/10/30/p ... searchers/

[stevebrooks]

In other good news, Harris is leading in non-swing states, well technically they are swing states I guess if Harris is leading, but not traditionally swing states if you know what I mean;

[stevebrooks]

News.com at it again;

Donald Trump is leading Kamala Harris in every swing state by a narrow margin, according to a new poll.

The latest survey of likely voters by AtlasIntel, published on Saturday night, shows the Republican nominee is favoured to win in North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

Four of the states are polling outside the margin of error.

The Republican’s lead is strongest in Arizona, where he has a 6.5 point advantage over the Democrat on 52.3 per cent to 45.8 per cent.

This mob, AtlasIntel are showing Trump leading in every swing state and with the popular vote despite every other poll I have seen showing Kamala winning.

it's funny when you look thought he aggregate polls show Kamala leading in most swing states and in the popular vote. The 3 pollsters in 538 showing Trump in the lead are ones I have not seen until recently on there before, AtlasIntel, TIPP Inisghts, Kaplan Strategies with SoCal strategies being a republican sponsered polling org. It's dodgy as anything in my opinion.

https://www.news.com.au/world/north-ame ... 433dc2b704

[stevebrooks]

News.com at it again;

Donald Trump is leading Kamala Harris in every swing state by a narrow margin, according to a new poll.

The latest survey of likely voters by AtlasIntel, published on Saturday night, shows the Republican nominee is favoured to win in North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

Four of the states are polling outside the margin of error.

The Republican’s lead is strongest in Arizona, where he has a 6.5 point advantage over the Democrat on 52.3 per cent to 45.8 per cent.

This mob, AtlasIntel are showing Trump leading in every swing state and with the popular vote despite every other poll I have seen showing Kamala winning.

it's funny when you look thought he aggregate polls show Kamala leading in most swing states and in the popular vote. The 3 pollsters in 538 showing Trump in the lead are ones I have not seen until recently on there before, AtlasIntel, TIPP Inisghts, Kaplan Strategies with SoCal strategies being a republican sponsered polling org. It's dodgy as anything in my opinion.

https://www.news.com.au/world/north-ame ... 433dc2b704

Update on this, it appears the pollster mention in the news.com article is a notoriously biased conservative pollster, you can see the exact polls news.com is referencing at 6m and onwards in this video, I though something smelt funny about those polls!



So this is a cherry picked far right leaning pollster, none of which was mention in the news.com article, they really need to vet their stories and reporters a bit better!

[wolty]

In other good news, Harris is leading in non-swing states, well technically they are swing states I guess if Harris is leading, but not traditionally swing states if you know what I mean;

I've watched a few of the videos on youtube on this. What's really interesting are the comments. Yes it's about the Dobbs decision in Iowa but it's also about the tariffs that caused harm in places like Iowa during Trumps last presidency.

[stylofone]

Michael Moore has a good track record, famously getting it right in 2016. He is now predicting a big win for Harris. Women will save America, he says, pretty much.

[stevebrooks]

Video here about the partisan polling that shows Trump in the lead in all swing states, it's just voter suppression people, voter suppression. Or attempted voter suppression anyway, and of course grounds to argue that Dem;s cheated because all the polls showed Trump winning;